Had an MS3X on the test bench today... - Page 4 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


MEGAsquirt A place to collectively sort out this megasquirt gizmo

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-24-2010, 07:02 PM   #61
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 248
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben View Post
Let me know if there's any data I can send you from the dyno session. Jerry intentionally ran through transients on the rollers so we could capture what you asked for.
Yeah, he had gotten me in contact with the developer (his name escapes me now). What I had originally wanted to see was a log from his controller of actual valve timing versus commanded timing during quick transients such as freerevving in neutral in a manner that would happen when doing things like rev-matching for a down-shift.

The developer was supposed to be getting me that data and then I never heard back.

If you have that data I'd like to see it. My stipulation was that I'd implement it functionally the same as that developer (but without using his code directly) if the difference between actual timing and commanded timing was minimal. If it isn't minimal, then the "load" axis on the MS3 code's table will only exist when using a MAF, and in speed density mode, it'll just be RPM based.

Either way we'll have continuously variable timing control, it's just a matter of how it'll be done in the speed density case.

EDIT: Just to add, either way, implementing this has very wide-reaching implications for our code. (In other words, just saying "I'll implement it" makes it sound easier than it is). It's a pretty complicated thing to add to our code which is why we made the decision for it to go into 1.1 and/or 2.0 and not 1.0.

Ken
muythaibxr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2010, 07:05 PM   #62
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 248
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shuiend View Post
All I can say is that you Developers for MS are amazing.
We're not amazing, we just like doing what we do!

Quote:
Is there some place that I can donate money
Not at this point.

Quote:
or beer
If you go to the megameet in Reading PA this year, I'll be happy to drink beer bought for me by you (or anyone, including myself)

Quote:
or blow?
If I did that, I don't think you'd want to drive on my code...

Ken
muythaibxr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2010, 07:08 PM   #63
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,899
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

the meet is in up in Reading this year? I'm so there.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2010, 07:37 PM   #64
Ben
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (33)
 
Ben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: atlanta-ish
Posts: 12,689
Total Cats: 99
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muythaibxr View Post
Yeah, he had gotten me in contact with the developer (his name escapes me now). What I had originally wanted to see was a log from his controller of actual valve timing versus commanded timing during quick transients such as freerevving in neutral in a manner that would happen when doing things like rev-matching for a down-shift.

The developer was supposed to be getting me that data and then I never heard back.

If you have that data I'd like to see it. My stipulation was that I'd implement it functionally the same as that developer (but without using his code directly) if the difference between actual timing and commanded timing was minimal. If it isn't minimal, then the "load" axis on the MS3 code's table will only exist when using a MAF, and in speed density mode, it'll just be RPM based.

Either way we'll have continuously variable timing control, it's just a matter of how it'll be done in the speed density case.

EDIT: Just to add, either way, implementing this has very wide-reaching implications for our code. (In other words, just saying "I'll implement it" makes it sound easier than it is). It's a pretty complicated thing to add to our code which is why we made the decision for it to go into 1.1 and/or 2.0 and not 1.0.

Ken
I understand the commanded vs actual tracking was bang on in transients. Developer's name is Kevin. He is as busy as he is smart, and tends to take a couple of days to answer email. He's also an occasional reader of this board, so who knows, maybe he'll stop by.

We're well aware that it won't be an easy implementation. but adding this feature set to the hardware will be an amazing benefit to the community.
Ben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2010, 09:07 PM   #65
mkturbo.com
iTrader: (24)
 
shuiend's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 13,780
Total Cats: 1,106
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muythaibxr View Post
If you go to the megameet in Reading PA this year, I'll be happy to drink beer bought for me by you (or anyone, including myself)

Ken
Hell if someone puts out a date for the MegaMeet I will be there. I had a blast when I went a few years ago.
shuiend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2010, 10:38 PM   #66
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 248
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
the meet is in up in Reading this year? I'm so there.
Yep, here's the thread on it at msextra.com:

Megasquirt MSEXTRA and MS3EFI • View topic - MegaMeet 2010 - June 25-26th, Reading, PA

Ken
muythaibxr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2010, 10:42 PM   #67
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 248
Total Cats: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben View Post
I understand the commanded vs actual tracking was bang on in transients. Developer's name is Kevin. He is as busy as he is smart, and tends to take a couple of days to answer email. He's also an occasional reader of this board, so who knows, maybe he'll stop by.

We're well aware that it won't be an easy implementation. but adding this feature set to the hardware will be an amazing benefit to the community.
Last I heard though nobody had gotten that data on the kind of transients I'm talking about, only slower ones in gear on the dyno. I'm most interested in the "quick blip" case, as having fuel wrong due to the variable valve timing not keeping up with conditions could cause weird issues with throttle response in those conditions. If you could email me that data on the quick-blip freerev transients, I'd appreciate it.

As far as my comment on the difficulty of it, my main point was more that it touches a lot of "stable" code that we didn't want to touch for 1.0 in the ignition area.

For 2.0 I'm converting everything to the angle clock ignition method which should free up a lot of CPU cycles and give the same or better accuracy as before so that's where I'd prefer to make large changes to ignition.

However, since I realize a lot of people really want this feature, I will try to get it done for 1.1 instead.

Ken
muythaibxr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2010, 10:49 PM   #68
mkturbo.com
iTrader: (24)
 
shuiend's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 13,780
Total Cats: 1,106
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muythaibxr View Post
Last I heard though nobody had gotten that data on the kind of transients I'm talking about, only slower ones in gear on the dyno. I'm most interested in the "quick blip" case, as having fuel wrong due to the variable valve timing not keeping up with conditions could cause weird issues with throttle response in those conditions. If you could email me that data on the quick-blip freerev transients, I'd appreciate it.

As far as my comment on the difficulty of it, my main point was more that it touches a lot of "stable" code that we didn't want to touch for 1.0 in the ignition area.

For 2.0 I'm converting everything to the angle clock ignition method which should free up a lot of CPU cycles and give the same or better accuracy as before so that's where I'd prefer to make large changes to ignition.

However, since I realize a lot of people really want this feature, I will try to get it done for 1.1 instead.

Ken
If you need a car to test on I should have my VVT motor up and running sometime in May. I will gladly drive up to Columbia to be a guinea pig.
shuiend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2010, 01:57 PM   #69
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 248
Total Cats: 0
Default

I may take you up on that but probably later than May.

It's probably going to be sometime in the summer before I even think about starting on it.

Thanks though, I'll definitely take you up on it.

Ken
muythaibxr is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3rd Time's a Charm...hopefully. zephyrusaurai Meet and Greet 2 09-28-2015 11:59 PM
Are my coils failing? viriiguy General Miata Chat 5 09-28-2015 08:39 PM
Help multi issues here! ReallyRottenTurbo MEGAsquirt 4 09-22-2015 01:49 PM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:45 PM.